http://blogs.gentoo.org/betelgeuse?disp=comments en-US http://backend.userland.com/rss 60 Thu, 01 May 2008 00:42:42 +0000 Andrew John Hughes [Visitor] c19824@http://blogs.gentoo.org/ It's good to see your side of the story explained. Perhaps I should explain some of my points in more detail:<br /> <br /> * You make it clear yourself that GNU Classpath is at 0.97 'for x86 and amd64'. Thus it can't be truly stable as it's not stable on all architectures. My comment was valid for the platform I was on at the time I wrote that - ppc64. I tried to emerge classpath and was greeted with 0.90.<br /> * The mixup over geki comes from the fact that he does seem to be maintaining an official Gentoo overlay. I wasn't aware there was a difference. Either way, his stance reflects on Gentoo and I've not been impressed with the offhand way he deals with things.<br /> However, the point about proprietary Java still rings true, even if the 'only' is really not deserved. As you know, I was looking at the possibility of maintaining Free Java on Gentoo. I've ended up doing this in a separate overlay simply because all the ebuilds I've submitted have been broken for the whims of proprietary JDK users.<br /> I'm used to the Debian/Ubuntu/Fedora approach to Java, which is that Free Java is in the main distribution. Sun's JDK is available, but as non-Free software it is outside the mainstream. Gentoo takes the opposite approach, which personally I feel is the wrong impression to be giving for a GNU/Linux distribution. But that's your choice. However, while that remains the case, I don't really feel I can promote Gentoo as an environment for Free Java users.
* You make it clear yourself that GNU Classpath is at 0.97 'for x86 and amd64'. Thus it can't be truly stable as it's not stable on all architectures. My comment was valid for the platform I was on at the time I wrote that - ppc64. I tried to emerge classpath and was greeted with 0.90.
* The mixup over geki comes from the fact that he does seem to be maintaining an official Gentoo overlay. I wasn't aware there was a difference. Either way, his stance reflects on Gentoo and I've not been impressed with the offhand way he deals with things.
However, the point about proprietary Java still rings true, even if the 'only' is really not deserved. As you know, I was looking at the possibility of maintaining Free Java on Gentoo. I've ended up doing this in a separate overlay simply because all the ebuilds I've submitted have been broken for the whims of proprietary JDK users.
I'm used to the Debian/Ubuntu/Fedora approach to Java, which is that Free Java is in the main distribution. Sun's JDK is available, but as non-Free software it is outside the mainstream. Gentoo takes the opposite approach, which personally I feel is the wrong impression to be giving for a GNU/Linux distribution. But that's your choice. However, while that remains the case, I don't really feel I can promote Gentoo as an environment for Free Java users.]]> http://blogs.gentoo.org/betelgeuse/2008/04/28/foss_java_status_on_gentoo#c19824 Mon, 28 Apr 2008 19:28:50 +0000 Joe [Visitor] c19820@http://blogs.gentoo.org/ Thanks for all your work, Petteri- making the Sun JDK easily available in Gentoo saves me a lot of time and effort working on my Java projects. I'm not too familiar with the other implementations, but none of them have the deployment track record of the "official" JVM. I wouldn't hesitate to use Sun's JVM on a production system- I don't (yet) have that trust in any of the others. http://blogs.gentoo.org/betelgeuse/2008/04/28/foss_java_status_on_gentoo#c19820